About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
, in pakistan rather. >> today we honor a singular act of gallantry. as we near the 10th anniversary of the attacks thrust our nation into war, it is the occasion to pay tribute to a soldier and a generation that has borne the burden of our security during a hard decade of sacrifice. i want to take you back to the circumstances that led to this day. it is may 26, 2008. in the remote eastern afghanistan, near the mountainous border of pakistan. helicopters carrying dozens of a lead army rangers race over the rugged landscape. and their target is an insurgent, down. the mission is high risk. it is broad daylight. the insurgents are heavily armed. but it is considered a risk worth taking because intelligence indicates that a top al qaeda commander is in that compound. soon the helicopters touched down, and our rangers immediately come under fire. within minutes, leroy -- then a staff sergeant -- and another soldier are pushing ahead into a courtyard surrounded by high mud walls. that is when the enemy opens up with their a k-47's. leroy is hit in both legs. he's bleeding badly. but he s
a pakistan on this particular trip. did he talk about what pakistan was not on his itinerary? guest: he did not talk about that specifically. it was very focused on afghanistan, but also on the border between afghanistan and pakistan. he did not say specifically why he did not go. i think it is pretty clear for a couple of reasons. the u.s. is trying to gauge just how much cooperation they can get from pakistan going forward. pakistan has a lot of u.s. trainers that have been working intensely with their special forces, and as a result of that, withheld some of the decade that went with them. they also repelled some of the partnership on the war on terrorism, so to speak. they are still trying to gauge that. for now, in the past, the key relationship between the u.s. and pakistan and the military have been between admiral mullen and his pakistan counterpart, the army chief of staff. i think that this point, the u.s. is still trying to weigh what they can do to move this cooperation forward with pakistan. host: the defense policy reporter a bloomberg news, thank you for being on the "washing
money to countries that waste it -- pakistan. keep military, share the wealth between branches, and don't cut education." the president: you know, the one thing i would say is, on the notion of giving money to countries that waste it -- and pakistan is listed there -- i think it's important for people to know that foreign aid accounts for less than 2 percent of our budget. and if you defined it just narrowly as the kind of foreign aid to help feed people and what we think of classically as foreign aid, it's probably closer to 1 percent. so sometimes people have an exaggerated sense that we spend 25 percent of the federal budget on foreign aid. it's a tiny amount that has a big impact. and i think america, to be a leader in the world, to have influence, to help stabilize countries and create opportunity for people so that they don't breed terrorists or create huge refugee flows and so forth, it's smart for us to make a very modest investment in foreign aid. it's a force multiplier and it's something that even in tough fiscal times america needs to continue to do as part of our role a
on the side of safety. host: unless the administration certifies that pakistan is making progress in fighting terrorism, this is what howard berman of california has to say -- guest: i agree with that premise. we need to keep pressure on pakistan to make absolutely sure that no part of their government supports radical organizations like the taliban are al qaeda. we have to remember that they are alert -- they are nuclear power. we do not want radical elements in getting control all those weapons. in addition, pakistan is a conduit to get weapons in to fight the taliban. it is a thorny issue in the one that we have to work out. to cut up pakistan immediately would be a mistake. host: greg, independent line. caller: as long as the budget is an issue, eliminate the patriots back, homeland security, the police. fire those people. fire them right now. get the money from there. no one was concerned about the budget when bush was fighting a war on two fronts. i was in the national guard and the marines. i did not go the last three times because my son came back. the national guard, it is a good thi
less than that. but there is a move to cut some of that funding. most interestingly enough on pakistan, because of the tension in u.s.-pakistani relations in the wake of the death of osama bin laden so that has been on the table. but as far as a percentage of what goes out, it's relatively small. the interesting thing, though, here, is that there is -- have put tax increases on the table. they've put some defense spending on the table. you didn't see that years ago, that they were willing to cut defense. so that's significant. but foreign aid is something that has been discussed of pairing back. host: "the daily caller" has a story about ron paul, as our caller and also -- ron paul calls on supporters to lobby leadership for no compromise. ron paul blasted top house republicans for lack of called on supporters to pressure top g.o.p. officials not to cut a back room deal with president obama. in an e-mail sent thursday evening to supporters of his presidential bid he couraged backers to help republican leaders make up their mind. the republican leadership is us is exceptible -- suscepti
in afghanistan because of the dangerous instability across the border in nuclear armed pakistan. but does anyone believe the war in afghanistan has made pakistan more safe? no, it has not. in fact, it's more fragile now than it's ever been. the threat from afghanistan is gone. bring the troops home. eugene robertson is not a conservative. we see him on tv all the time. and i will say that he nailed it with this editorial. the threat from afghanistan is gone, bring him home. mr. speaker, as i close always on the floor of the house, for these little girls, who have lost their father, and all the children who have lost their fathers and moms over in afghanistan and iraq, i ask god to please bless our men and women in uniform. i ask god to please bless the families of our men and women in uniform. i ask god in his loving arms to hold the families who have given a child dying for freedom in afghanistan and iraq. i ask god to please bless the house and senate we will do what is right in the eyes of god for his people. i ask god to give strength, wisdom, and courage to mr. obama he will do what is righ
that wasted like pakistan. share the wealth and do not cut education. >> the one thing i would say about giving money to countries that we stick with pakistan listed, i think it is important for people to know the foreign aid accounts for less than 2% of our budget. if you define it as the foreign if you define it as the foreign aid to help feed people and classic foreign-aid, it is closer to 1%. sometimes people have an exaggerated sense that we spend 25% of the federal budget on foreign aid. it is a tiny amount that has a big impact. for america to be a leader in the world and have influence, to help stabilize countries and great opportunity for people so they do not breed terrorists or create huge refugee flows, it is smart for us to make a modest investment in foreign aid. it is a force multiplier. it is something american needs to continue to do in our role as a global leader. >> the next one is simple from daniel. we need to raise taxes. [laughter] >> as i have said before, if wealthy individuals are willing to simply go back to the rates whenexisted in the 1990's rich people were
interference. we have laws to be obeyed. >> unless it comes from the pakistan isi. >> thank you for this example. >> we have money going to the ngo's who have rejected it. >> registered. >> according to our laws. we have an organization here in the united states helping egypt to manage elections. we're giving some money to the justice and interior ministers. they are welcomed. mr. sweeney is all over egypt. it is a matter of sovereignty, to have some money from abroad [unintelligible] not egypt only can accept that. >> i would ask two more questions and then we will turn it over to steve. you mentioned that you and your colleagues are ready to go back to your professional jobs as military men. eager. >> that is correct. >> since 1952 the egyptian military has played a fairly prominent role in egyptian life. you cannot say that it has only played a military role but it has played a military and political role since 1952. and right now you're playing one of your most important roles in your history. if the project works, new parliament, new president, and we are on a new track tow
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)